Comment on Big Surprise—Nobody Wants 8K TVs
jqubed@lemmy.world 4 days agoI think it’s NHK, or one of the Japanese broadcasters anyways, that has actually been pressing for 8K since the 1990s. They didn’t have content back then and I doubt they have much today, but that’s what they wanted HD to be.
NuXCOM_90Percent@lemmy.zip 4 days ago
Not familiar with NHK specifically, but it really makes a lot of sense for news networks to push for 8k or even 16k at this point.
Because it is a chicken and egg thing. Nobody is going to buy an 8k TV if all the things they watch are 1440p. But, similarly, there aren’t going to be widespread 8k releases if everyone is watching on 1440p screens and so forth.
But what that ALSO means is that there is no reason to justify using 8k cameras if the best you can hope for is a premium 4k stream of a sporting event. And news outlets are fairly regularly the only source of video evidence of literally historic events.
From a much more banal perspective, it is why there is a gap in TV/film where you go from 1080p or even 4k re-releases to increasingly shady upscaling of 720 or even 480 content back to everything being natively 4k. Over simplifying, it is because we were using MUCH higher quality cameras than we really should have been for so long before switching to cheaper film and outright digital sensors because “there is no point”. Obviously this ALSO is dependent on saving the high resolution originals but… yeah.
acosmichippo@lemmy.world 4 days ago
it’s not exactly “there is no point”. It’s more like “the cost to film and broadcast in 8k is not economically feasible”.
Knock_Knock_Lemmy_In@lemmy.world 4 days ago
Filming in 8k does have advantages. You can crop without losing quality.
paraphrand@lemmy.world 4 days ago
I’m sorry, but if we are talking about 8k viability in TVs, we are not talking about shooting in 8k for 4k delivery.
You should be pointing out shooting in higher than 8k, so you have the freedom to crop in post, is part of the reason 8k is burdensome and expensive.
NuXCOM_90Percent@lemmy.zip 4 days ago
Which, for all intents and purposes, means there is no point. Because no news network is going to respond to “Hey boss, I want us to buy a bunch of really expensive cameras that our audience will never notice because it will make our tape library more valuable. Oh, not to sell, but to donate to museums.” with anything other than laughter and MAYBE firing your ass.
acosmichippo@lemmy.world 4 days ago
the point is, the cost/benefit calculation will change over time as the price of everything goes down. It’s not a forever “no point”.